DB server performace if long transaction happen

DB server performace if long transaction happen

Post by falconsoo » Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:22:37

I have a long transaction (taking hours) with all tables is temp table
with no log and lock in exclusive mode, thus there will be no LOG
usage and less LOCK usage. Is this scenario will impact the database
server performace?

Thanks for any prompt reply and consultation.

1. New IFS interface (jfs.ifs, udf.ifs for example)

2. OLE DB provider "SQLNCLI" for linked server "linkedserver" returned message "No transaction is active.".

I'm getting the above error when trying to perform a DML across a linked
server. A select works fine. I've tried setting XACT_ABORT ON and IMPLICIT
TRANSACTIONS OFF but still throws error. Is this a behavior change between
the SQL Native Client VS the SQL OLEDB provider? In SQL 2000, if I could
wrap a select inside a transaction, then everything else worked fine as

Throws Error:

begin tran

delete from linkedserver.db.dbo.table1
where col1 = '12345'

commit tran


begin tran

select * from linkedserver.db.dbo.table1
where col1 = '12345'

commit tran

3. Linked server using ODBC Provider and DB transaction.

4. Cannot shrink transaction log of a SQL Server 2005 db

5. Some simple performace tests (long)

6. Clustered sql servers -->transaction logs, and db's on 2 different media sets (restore)

7. Poor performace re-attaching DB after a detach

8. Have a trouble with Linked Server (Oracle) (OLE DB was unable to begin a distributed transaction)

9. Principle server Transactions status in DB Mirroring

10. db server slow - SET TRANSACTION LEVEL READ COMMITTED causing it?

11. Takes too long time to connect to DB server

12. Oracle DB to MS Sql Server DB Replication question...via Sql Server Views??

13. Upgrade of SQL Server 2000 DB to SQL Server 2005 DB

14. Mulitple Project Server DBs on same DB server -- View Processi

15. Transfering data from one DB server to another DB server.